Revenue authority mandates using scheme-specific reversal procedures, not revising original entries, for instrument-based trade/customs benefits effec...
Transaction value under s.15(1) governs unrelated sales; valuation between related parties per Rule 28; consignment note required for unregistered rec...
HC examined the legality of the suspension of the petitioner, a State Tax Officer, under the U.P. Government Servant (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1999. Considering that the petitioner had submitted an adverse investigation report against the concerned firm on 03-12-2024, which formed the basis of the subsequent show cause notice dated 05-12-2024, and that GST credit was claimed thereafter on 13-01-2025, HC held that no prima facie misconduct warranting suspension was made out. Consequently, the suspension order dated 23-08-2025 issued by the Commissioner, State Tax, Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow was quashed. However, HC clarified that the authorities are at liberty to initiate and conclude a departmental inquiry within four months. The writ petition was disposed of accordingly.
HC examined the legality of the suspension of the petitioner, a State Tax Officer, under the U.P. Government Servant (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1999. Considering that the petitioner had submitted an adverse investigation report against the concerned firm on 03-12-2024, which formed the basis of the subsequent show cause notice dated 05-12-2024, and that GST credit was claimed thereafter on 13-01-2025, HC held that no prima facie misconduct warranting suspension was made out. Consequently, the suspension order dated 23-08-2025 issued by the Commissioner, State Tax, Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow was quashed. However, HC clarified that the authorities are at liberty to initiate and conclude a departmental inquiry within four months. The writ petition was disposed of accordingly.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
